https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781221 The AT dismissed the appellant's appeal, holding that the appellant failed to comply with LODR obligations, delayed compliance between 45-904 days, and misrepresented facts to the stock exchange by furnishing a bank guarantee for SOP fines then changing its stance after BSE approval. The Tribunal upheld BSE's imposition (and partial reduction) of fines totaling Rs. 1.62 Crores, rejecting a double-jeopardy argument because SEBI and BSE regulatory actions operate in distinct spheres. The appeal was therefore dismissed. en-us Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Nov 2025 08:14:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781221 The AT dismissed the appellant's appeal, holding that the appellant failed to comply with LODR obligations, delayed compliance between 45-904 days, and misrepresented facts to the stock exchange by furnishing a bank guarantee for SOP fines then changing its stance after BSE approval. The Tribunal upheld BSE's imposition (and partial reduction) of fines totaling Rs. 1.62 Crores, rejecting a double-jeopardy argument because SEBI and BSE regulatory actions operate in distinct spheres. The appeal was therefore dismissed. Case-Laws SEBI Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781221